Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss dubious hit counts in search results.Design/methodology/approachUses not only traditional databases and search engines but also unique citation databases to gain informative hit figures.FindingsSearches are finding materials that are clearly not scholarly materials.Originality/valueShows the importance of a more defined search, thus less distortion of counts.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,Information Systems
Reference8 articles.
1. Gorman, G.E. (2005), “How do we count our chickens? Or do citation counts count?”, Online Information Review, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 581‐4, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520510638043.
2. Jacsó, P. (1997), “Information science abstracts”, Database, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 86‐7.
3. Jacsó, P. (2003), “Peter's picks & pans”, Online, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 53‐5.
4. Jacsó, P. (2004), “ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and SPORTDiscus’ Peter's Picks and Pans”, Online, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 51‐4.
5. Jacsó, P. (2005), “Google Scholar: the pros and cons”, Online Information Review, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 208‐14, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520510598066.
Cited by
35 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献